USPTO serial 74252944
CRITICALL
Reviewed by CopyMark Law Group
Status 603
- Filing date
- Status date
- Registration date
- —
- Examiner
- DELANEY, ZHALEH SYBIL
- Law office
- FILE REPOSITORY (FRANCONIA)
What this means
This page summarizes the public USPTO record for this serial number, including owners, goods and services, and prosecution history.
Need help with CRITICALL?
If you own this trademark, we can monitor new filings and help with USPTO deadlines. If you do not, we can file a new U.S. application.
Current trademark owner
Monitor this mark, or talk with CopyMark about this registration.
Not the owner?
File a new U.S. trademark application, or speak with our attorneys.
Owner
Attorney of record
The USPTO lists this attorney as the applicant's representative for correspondence on this application.
Joseph R. Marcus
JOSEPH R MARCUS WELSH & KATZ, LTD135 S LASALLE ST STE 1625CHICAGO, IL 60603UNITED STATESGoods and services
| Class | Description | Status | First use |
|---|---|---|---|
| 038 | voice and data telecommunication services; namely, radio transmission and electronic communication between mobile trauma and emergency units on the ground and in the air and medical facilities; and, the electronic transmission of medical data | ABANDONED | Feb 15, 1993 |
Related trademarks
CopyMark links this record to cited §2(d) serials, the owner's other marks, Nice classes, similar mark names, and recently changed USPTO applications.
Prosecution history
| Date | Code | Event | What it means |
|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 5, 1996 | EXPT | EXPARTE APPEAL TERMINATED | — |
| Sep 22, 1995 | ABN3 | ABANDONMENT - AFTER EX PARTE APPEAL | — |
| Sep 22, 1995 | EXPA | EX PARTE APPEAL-REFUSAL AFFIRMED | — |
| Apr 3, 1995 | CNES | EXAMINERS STATEMENT MAILED | — |
| Oct 18, 1994 | EXPI | EX PARTE APPEAL-INSTITUTED | — |
| Sep 2, 1994 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| May 24, 1994 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| May 5, 1994 | AUPC | AMENDMENT TO USE PROCESSING COMPLETE | — |
| Apr 6, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Apr 6, 1994 | IUAF | USE AMENDMENT FILED | — |
| Feb 28, 1994 | CNCF | CONTINUATION OF FINAL REFUSAL MAILED | — |
| Jan 26, 1994 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jul 26, 1993 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| May 14, 1993 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Nov 17, 1992 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| Sep 14, 1992 | CRFA | CORRESPONDENCE RECEIVED IN LAW OFFICE | — |
| Jun 15, 1992 | CNRT | NON-FINAL ACTION MAILED | A non-final Office Action means the USPTO examining attorney has raised at least one issue with your trademark application but has not made a final decision. You usually have three months to respond with arguments, amendments, or evidence. Missing the deadline can abandon the application. |
| May 14, 1992 | DOCK | ASSIGNED TO EXAMINER | — |